Suicide Squad… What A Ride!

Great characterizations I can watch interact all day.

“Suicide Squad” expands the DC universe with the introduction of Viola Davis’ Amanda Waller, an uncompromising government official, who heads this covert group of expendable villains that she forces to do her biding.

She is coldblooded and I can’t wait to see her again in the DCEU. Surely she’ll continue with the suicide squad and maybe even fund Project Cadmus at some point down the line. She is an important character to the world building.

Now onto the squad themselves.

Will Smith as Deadshot is on point. It’s been a while since we’ve seen him shine like this. He brought back that charisma that made him a blockbuster leading man back in the day. This almost makes me forget “After Earth”. And his conflict with Joel Kinnaman’s Rick Flag is the most interesting pairing to watch develop as the movie progresses.

The characters are the star of the show and propel a simple story to an entertaining affair. Margot Robbie’s Harley Quinn plays the insane beauty to perfection and if DC is smart, we’ll be seeing more of her.

The other characters round up the squad and add their own brand of fun to the mix. Boomerang is Jai Courtney’s best role since “Spartacus”. Diablo is totally likeable. I would have liked to have seen a bit more from Killer Croc and Katana.

The Joker doesn’t have a big role, but that was evident from the trailers. I would have liked an added scene from him though or an extension of a scene because his scenes felt very short, almost like cliff notes. But there was enough in there to get a taste of what we will almost assuredly see in a Batman solo. And please oh please, can I have “Superman: Emperor Joker”.

The weak spot comes from the secondary villain. Maybe she’s the main villain; but for me, Amanda Waller is the main villain among a movie filled with villains. I think this secondary villain was a bit rushed. I don’t think the story needed a magical element. It could have just gone the simplistic route just like the animated “DCU Batman: Assault on Arkham”.

“Suicide Squad” doesn’t need a fantastical story with a lot of special affects. I could watch the squad walk through a mall and I’d be entertained. For the sequel, keep it simple. Because the characters are perfect. This is an example of getting the characters so right that it carries the entire film. Make a good script and the sequel will blow up at the box office.


 Score: 7/10

 

Star Trek Beyond, A Reminder Of The Things I Loved About The TV Show

The crew of the Enterprise return in “Star Trek Beyond”, an action sci-fi that shines, not in the heat of the battles, but in the quieter moments that exude between the characters.

The film kicks off with the crew having been in space for quite a while. They miss the loved ones left behind. And the isolation has transformed the ship into a mini society. I appreciate a scene between Captain Kirk and McCoy that is reminiscent of a scene between them in “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan”.

Consistent with this franchise trope, at some point Captain Kirk learns of a distress call which, as we expect, propels him and the enterprise into action.

As shown in the trailers, this mission doesn’t end well for one of the main characters—the star ship enterprise.

I’ve watched all the old television shows, the Next Generation and the movies. And seeing the enterprise torn apart has never been fun to watch. I feel an emotional connection to her and it’s a heart-breaking moment for me.

The crew are forced to abandon the enterprise and end up on a planet where they meet the main villain—Krall. It’s not easy to act in heavy make-up but the accomplished actor (who’s name I won’t say because it might be a spoiler) does an amazing job of expressing himself through facial movements and body language.

“Star Trek Beyond” capitalizes on character interactions by spreading the team out in pairs: Dr. McCoy and Spock, Captain Kirk and Chekov, Sulu and Uhura and lastly, Scotty and new comer Jaylah (Sofia Boutella).

Jaylah is a great addition. She’s smart and can handle herself. And I loved the chemistry between her and Scotty. Speaking of chemistry, anytime you can give us scenes with Spock and McCoy is a plus.

The negative comes in the third act, which feels like too much is happening. Just when you think the movie is coming to an end, it tacks on another portion to elongate it. And it flails here because in order to tack on this second ending, the space fight has a quick and easy solution that makes it feel more like something the writers just needed to rush through so they could to arrive where they wanted to all along—a one on one fight.

This leads to an interesting back story for Krall. Though I would have liked to know more.

“Star Trek Beyond” is an enjoyable ride, which exceeds the second film in this rebooted franchise. The action scenes are fun. The set pieces are very well done. Although the plot in the third act feels rushed and anemic, the film focuses on the character dynamics, which is what made me fall in love with the franchise to begin with, as it hits the right notes of heart felt moments.

 Score: 8.25/10

The Legend of Tarzan: An Entertaining Swing Through The Jungle

“The Legend of Tarzan” neatly juggles a collection of subplots, and streamlines them into a coherent and enjoyable tale that touches on the social injustices of slavery.

The film begins with Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård) married to Jane (Margot Robbie) and living in England. It plays like a sequel that drizzles in flashbacks that serve as both a reminder of Tarzan’s origin, as well as a way to establish his relationships to the apes who adopted him.

The flashbacks to Tarzan’s jungle life are compelling. And the majority of the heart of the story, as it pertains to Tarzan, lies here where he is loved by his ape mother. I could have used a few more of these flashbacks.

Present day, Tarzan and Jane travel back to Africa under false pretenses, designed by a scheming Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz), who is loosely working with Chief Mbonga (Djimon Hounsou)—a man bent on revenge .

Rom wants what so many have wanted from Africa—diamonds.

Rom’s greed and just plain lack of humanity has used slavery for physical labor. This subplot injects heart into the main story—add to this, the killing of animals. I would have liked to have seen more of this, but that would have made this a very different story with not much time to focus on Tarzan’s return and escapades in saving Jane. Maybe if we get a sequel to this.



Acting

Alexander Skarsgård is a talented actor, whose star I’d love to see continue to rise. He showed great charisma in “True Blood”. However, if “The Legend of Tarzan” was the only movie I saw him in, I would have thought he was mostly a great pair of abs. And I don’t think it’s his fault.

Skarsgård is not given enough to work with and so he sort of dulls against the other more vibrant characters that surround him. As it stands, what he is given is played rather stoic as if he’s internalizing his feelings—which I think is mainly a directorial choice. Maybe to balance him out with Samuel L. Jackson, who doesn’t play his usual style.

Instead, he plays George Washington Williams, who is out of his element in the wild, which added a humorous charm.

Margot Robbie, as Jane, finds herself in the damsel in distress category but makes the best of it. She doesn’t just wait to be rescued, she is her own force to be reckoned with. 



And Christoph Waltz, as Leon Rom, is a watered down version of Hans Landa—as good as we’ve come to expect but nothing extraordinary.



Cinematography/CGI

The shots of Africa are breathtaking, particularly the day shots that offer sweeping views.

The apes are done very well. It isn’t all perfect. The scene with the stampede looks a bit off; but as a whole, it’s good enough. Technology is such that we can now see Tarzan swing on vines in all its glory.



Overall

The film entertains. The character of Tarzan could have used more moments to shine and express himself instead of coming off as a straight man to Samuel L. Jackson’s character. And for a sequel, I would prefer a simpler story with less secondary characters so that the subplots can breath a bit more. Whereas in “The Legend of Tarzan”, the relationship between Chief Mbonga and Tarzan felt short changed.



 Score: 7/10

 

Classics: The Treasure Of The Sierra Madre

“The Treasure Of The Sierra Madre” stars Humphrey Bogart in one his greatest performances as Dobbs—a man who plummets into greed laden paranoia.

Set in Mexico, Dobbs is an American beggar who meets and bonds with another down-and-out American, Curtin played by Tim Holt. The two men struggle to survive, begging for pesos and looking for labor, as they find themselves susceptible to con artists.

They stay at a Old Oso Negro…

…where they come in contact with an old prospector. Howard, played by Walter Huston who tells stories of his days as a prospector, digging for gold.

And it’s clear that he still longs for those days. But he also shares his experiences about fellow prospectors who’ve done bad things in the name of greed.

And here is where the story begins. Dobbs convinces Howard to take them gold digging. Though, it didn’t take much convincing. Walter Huston played the role with incredible charm and a laugh that brightens up the screen. His personality offered a great contrast to the seriousness of Dobbs impending insanity.

The three men trek through dangerous territory, inhabited by bandits. Until, Howard finds a great spot where all their dreams are about to come true.

But as the story progresses and the gold mounts up, Dobbs sees everything and everyone around him differently. The madness was an impressive thing to to watch and one can’t help but be glued to the screen waiting on the outcome.



**Spoilers**

Analysis/Dobbs:

Between the time Howard first tells Dobbs and Curtin about prospecting AND the time Dobbs convinces Howard to go with them, both Dobbs and Curtin have a private conversation.

“Do you believe what that old man, who was doing all the talking at the Old Oso Negro, said the other night about Gold changing a man’s soul so that he ain’t the same kind of a guy as he was before finding it.” - Dobbs

“I guess it all depends on the man.” - Curtin

“…Gold don’t carry any curse with it… Gold could be as much of a blessing as a curse.” - Dobbs

I ask myself, was it clear that Dobbs had it in him to descend into what he would become? Was he always this way or did he just flip out?

From how the story progressed, it was clear to me that Dobbs was a good guy. Plus, Howard (the voice of reason) said so even after all that had gone down. Before they left for digging, the three men discussed how much money they needed for supplies. Curtin fell short of the amount.

But Dobbs had won last night’s lottery and, without hesitation, offered to cover Curtin’s share of the expenses. So deep inside, he started out very honest with a hint of selflessness.

So how did he change?

One thing that is very consistent with Dobbs is his susceptibility to suggestion. When one guy mentioned a job, he quickly took it… okay, sure, he needed the work; but there’s something more.

The moment Howard talks about prospecting, it took all of a couple of minutes for Dobbs to get that glint in his eye. He wanted a piece of that action.  

Fast forward to the men finding gold and dividing it up into threes…

Howard shared another of his stories. He mentioned that some men like to hide their stash for fear that the other guys might steal from them. This triggered Dobbs hiding his portion of the gold under a rock. Though, Curtin did also. Both men unable to sleep, fearing the other would hunt for their stash. Howard didn’t seem to worry much. He slept fine, not getting involved in all this paranoia. And it felt like Curtin’s actions were in response to Dobbs.

But would Dobbs have hid his stash had Howard not put the idea in his mind? We won’t know the answer, of course. But I suspect, it would have taken a bit longer to get to that stage.

His change escalated when he brought up the money he put up for Curtin’s share. He felt he should get a bigger part of the gold than Curtin. But when Curtin offered gold, not just equal but more than what was given to him, Dobbs took it and dumped it on the ground as if to say he didn’t want it. Dobbs is teetering here… from greed back to normalcy.

But there came a point when he was too far gone.


Lack of water

Dehydrating is never good for anyone. It makes people see things that aren’t there. Now rewind a moment, there was a moment (before his madness), when Dobbs thought he found gold and splashed rocks with water to get a closer inspection of the sparkles. But it was fool’s gold instead and Howard gave him a warning.

“Water’s precious. Sometimes it’s more precious than gold.” - Howard

Add this to Dobbs’ building greed and paranoia and you can see his madness growing.

Why water didn’t affect Curtin that way? Each person is different. Dobbs was rather hyper and he was already weak of mind.

**end spoiler**


Conclusion

“The Treasure Of The Sierra Madre” was a fascinating study on the affects of greed lead by an accomplished actor. And the ending was both satisfying and tension-filled.


 Score 10/10

REVIEW “Independence Day: Resurgence”, The Where Are They Now Edition

“Independence Day: Resurgence” plays out like a set-up to the real story that will come out in a couple of years… or maybe not.

I’m a fan of the original and was looking forward to this. But even the action sequences couldn’t make up for gratuitous characters, scattered plots and just plain lack of heart.

“Independence Day: Resurgence” had so many problems that I’m going to put my stamps of approval or disapproval on this.

Jumping 20 years in the future and we see an expansive demonstration of how the world has changed. Humanity has taken advantage of the alien technology from building a station on the moon to flying crafts that can cross the stratosphere, traveling between earth and space. Also, guns have gotten a slick make over.

This was very well done, making the film feel like a genuine sci-fi movie. And it made sense. I appreciated the thoughtfulness that went into it.

Meanwhile, information is fed to us through conversations and speeches to bring us up to speed and the fact that humanity has been preparing for a future attack.

But then it got a bit too much. The information turned into a…

C’mon man. This is a blockbuster popcorn flick. No need to expound that much.

This takes me back to “Mad Max: Fury Road” and how brilliant the world building was. I never felt the story stopped to “catch me up” on things.

Speaking of “catching me up” on things, here’s the “where are they now?” section…

Of course we have to re-visit all the old ones. There was even a large painting of a certain character in a very conspicuously odd place (I won’t ruin it for you, but you’ll know it when you see it).

Bill Pullman returns with a daughter, who is part of one of several love stories.

I think it hurt the film to have most of them come back. I rather the writers spend time writing a script that works instead of writing a script that fits around all these characters. Some had nothing much to do and felt shoe-horned. Though I did enjoy seeing Data. He was as loony as ever. Jeff Goldblum brought his charisma, though it wasn’t enough to save the movie.

Jessie T. Usher plays Will Smith’s son. Even though he’s given some character depth to play with, he either doesn’t take advantage of that as an actor OR his story is not given enough room to breath. And so he feels more like a tool to connect to Will Smith’s character and to add conflict to Liam Hemsworth, who gets his very own stamp…

What’s an action movie without the “doesn’t play by the rules” type. Oh and he’s a fighter pilot too, though not as charismatic as Tom Cruise


PLOT

The set-up was so long that it took nearly 40 minutes before the alien ship arrived, bringing along with it very good special effects. There was plenty of destruction to be had.

But then all these characters, old and new, find ways to come together…

…which includes some new characters like the president, a female scientist who is friends (potential love interest) with Goldblum, her assistant in a suit, a general and a warlord.

Out of the new characters, I mostly enjoyed the warlord (Deobia Oparei). Instead of having another sequel, just give me “Independence Day: The Warlord” prequel to the sequel.

Judd Hirsch character gets the…

Then there’s a couple of other subplots. One of which involves a couple of short, unnecessary scenes, with a ship of men. A second one is really interesting, but there is no time to fully develop it. But if they do a sequel maybe they can redeem themselves and do justice to this.

The fighter pilots have some fun scenes, bringing more new characters and another love story. And I really like the look of the aliens, though I’m not sure about the size.

The film tries to bring some emotion into it, but that falls flat because the characters don’t seem to be all that emotionally affected by what is going on. And when the characters enter the "gung ho" zone, they come dangerously close to feeling like they were ripped out of a Syfy TV movie, but without the fun campy charm.

If you just want to watch bits of destruction porn but don’t care about anything else then this should work for you.

The story left in a cliffhanger. And looking back, it feels as though all these characters were brought in and either moved around or off the board to make way for what's to come next. But there’s no guarantee that another film will be made, though I would like to see what they come up because it offers an interesting concept… better than this one.

Maybe they should have skipped to that story.


 Score 2/10

3 Flaws I Hope Batman v Superman Ultimate Edition Fixes

**spoilers**


When I first saw the movie, I considered making a write-up on what I thought the flaws were. But I decided to wait until the Ultimate Edition was close in hand.  I loved the movie. I saw it three times and each time I watched it, I loved it more. Generally speaking, this is not out of the norm for a movie, but in the case of BvS, I think the reason goes a bit deeper.

In addition, I do think the structure lacked dramatic irony, which is something I was looking forward to and didn’t really get. I discuss this in detail later in this article.

The “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition” adds another 30 minutes to the theatrical cut. The digital release is on the way, but I have already pre-ordered the blu-ray, which will arrive July 19. I am staying away from any spoilers as I hold out until then.

I don’t know if the extra 30 minutes will address the issues I had, but here are the 3 key things I wish were in the movie and hope are in the Ultimate Edition.


#3 Superman doing a personal save

Before I begin, let me just say that Superman is my favorite superhero.

We’ve seen Superman saving the world twice. He killed Zod and Doomsday, dying in the process of the later.

But what we haven’t seen is Superman saving a person (or people) on a personal level. Sure, Clark did it in “Man Of Steel”, but since he’s been Superman, that hasn’t been detailed.

Yes, he’s rescued Lois when she was pushed off the roof. And I loved when he saved Lex from Doomsday. That was a tremendous add. But I wanted something more.


What did we get?

There was a montage with people on the TV discussing the heroics of Superman, including Superman hovering over flood victims. But it lacked some warmth that comes with the type of save I’m thinking of.


Let’s looks at the fire scene:

Clark watches the tv, sees a fire and unbuttons his tie. Then we jump to him carrying the girl out, handing her to the mother when the crowd treats him like a God, which weighs on him in an emotional way.

I think this type of twist is bold and I appreciated it. I always wanted to see a Superman that had to deal with the pressures. But what was missing is the hope, the why behind what he does.

When you focus on the struggle and the pain, then as a viewer that’s what I’m going to feel. What was missing from the scene was the actual save.

Fire scene breakdown: Sees the fire, (skips the save part which is off screen), carries the girl and feels the weight of it all.

The save is where the hope comes from… where we see and feel why he does it. He can’t be saving people just because he has to. He has to do it because he wants to. That kind of thing was left to the “well he’s Superman so we know he’s a good guy.” But as a Superman fan, I want to feel it. I feel it by seeing and, therefore, experiencing it.

What should have happened: Superman flies into the burning building and saves the scared girl. This is the moment where we see the emotional reward. The why he does it. To give this girl hope that she will survive the fire. To give the mother outside, who sees Superman fly in, the hope that she will get her daughter back.

Now, this personal save didn’t have occur during the fire. It could have been something else. But the fire was the perfect spot.


#2 Clark investigating The Batman

We didn’t get much of Daily Planet Clark Kent in “Man Of Steel” and that’s fine since it was a Clark Kent/Jor-El becoming Superman story.

But here we have Superman disliking Batman for ideological reasons and we don’t see him doing a lot of research. It would have been nice to see him talk to that branding victim.

Clark felt rather sheltered. He was mainly in the office and didn’t have much contact with people outside of the usual suspects.  

Gotta add that I loved the scene where Clark Kent meets Bruce Wayne at the party. Their chemistry is off the charts, which bodes well for future Justice League films.


#1 Lex’ plan should be more upfront (eliminate the connect-the-dot method of story telling, add DRAMATIC IRONY)

One of the main concerns I read was:

• The film was a mess
• People didn’t understand some things (claiming plot holes)
• Africa seemed pointless (including the African woman at the Senate hearing)
• Lex plan made no sense

I was able to follow everything the first time I saw it. But I believe the reason I enjoyed it better the second time was because I knew what was happening. This is another thing I hear people say often.


Question: Why were people confused?

It’s been established that there were editing issues bringing the film from 3 hours to 2.5 hours. But you can edit and still not have some people feeling completely lost. It’s about WHAT you edit and HOW you order your scenes that could impact CLARITY.


Answer: connect-the-dot method of story telling

This comes from not knowing any of Lex’ scheme until later on. It really wasn’t until the senate bombing when all the pieces really came together. Inferences had to be made, then on the helipad scene, Lex boasted to Superman:

For some, by this time they were lost or maybe they stopped trying to follow what Lex was doing.

For others (like me), it was a rush of information as I connected the dots and got validation for what I had inferred.


How to fix the connect-the-dot method of story telling

Very simple. Something as quick as a two minute montage during the “18 months later” black screen where we see Lex in front of computer screens showing things like:

• Matching images of Clark with Superman
• Tracking the Batmobile to Bruce Wayne (using street cameras)
• Receiving files of the other Justice League members in an email to show that he is gathering intel on meta-humans
• Lex talking to KGBEast so we can establish that Lex is connected to the Africa incident when the Africa incident happens (instead of us having to connect the dots later).

Things like this. Now I’m not saying that we have to have a montage. But it’s just an easy way to go. What I am saying is that we needed something.

As it stands, the theatrical cut did not show us Lex being involved in things from the start. So it felt like a bunch of separate stories that took long to come together where the common thread ended up being Lex Luthor.

“The Dark Knight” also had a lot of stories and subplots. But it was easy to follow because the Joker’s plans were laid out for us. There weren’t a bunch of things happening behind the scenes with us left not knowing until much later on (like in BvS). Sure you can have twists and turns but you need to establish a foundation first.

For fun try this, watch “The Dark Knight” and imagine how the movie would feel if you eliminated the beginning Joker scene in the bank and the Joker meeting with the mafia men (you know, the disappearing pencil trick). Without the Joker as the connective thread, the story would feel messy.


Lack of Dramatic Irony

Dramatic irony, in a nutshell, is when the audience is privy to something the characters are not. It gives the audience a front seat to the action, because they’re in the know.

Example in a Horror movie: The audience sees a killer with a knife at the end of the hall. An unsuspecting character walks toward the danger and as she walks down the hallway, we are stressed out because we know something bad is lurking in wait.

When I saw the trailer with the party scene, it seemed like Lex knew who Bruce and Clark were.

But when the scene comes in the movie, we don’t know… not until it’s too late to enjoy it. Unless you’re on your second viewing. We also see Diana there.

Imagine if we knew that Lex knew who Clark and Bruce where… now imagine the same for Diana… the scene has a totally different feel and it becomes quite funny as we watch his pawns move around the room.

The connect-the-dot method of story telling robbed us of dramatic irony.